The Visual Editor is a huge failure

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:10 am

They really need to stop pretending that VE is going to get better over time.

The architecture is fundamentally flawed and their methodology is broken.

They need to start over with a solid requirements doc, a real software manager, a real software team and let them do it right.

This project is just pushing the peas around the plate.

The Joy · Unread post by **The Joy** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 8:37 pm

Hex wrote:
Peryglus wrote: A fuss has been kicking off at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Notifications_indicators_have_changed (T-H-L) because of some new icons that have appeared at the top of each WP page now, which splits notifications and messages. Is this a sign that the developers don't care what the community think or consult with them, as they're just playing around adding features that aren't going to be popular?
The eagle-eyed among you will no doubt have noticed that this is no longer the case. They had to roll back the feature after only a couple of days because it turned out to be causing huge rendering issues on some browsers.

The notification icons are back. They look smaller, though, at least on the latest Firefox browser.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 7:54 pm

Checking back on adoption rates for the VisualEnema **drumroll**

Periodically, 10 times during the day, pulling the most recent 1000 'recent changes' in 'article space' and searching for "tag: visualeditor" gives around 23 per 1000 edits.

5 years later and you have a 2.3% adoption rate on the largest wiki in the world.

Dear WMF,
How much has that cost the donors?
How much improvement in article construction or editor retention have you seen?

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:51 am

Vigilant, you should write Joan a friendly note.

To turn the Visual Editor on:
1. Log in to Wikipedia.
2. In the upper left part of your screen, after your username, click “Preferences”.
3. Click the tab that says “Beta features”.
4. Check the box that says “Visual editing.”
5. Scroll to the bottom of the page and click “Save.”

Wikipedia is doing a lot to make teaching with Wikipedia easier and more educational. I find it really powerful for teaching. My students’ first big assignment, adding 1200 words to a page on a bee, or starting a new page was just due. Can’t wait to see how they did!

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Mon Sep 28, 2015 5:50 pm

thekohser wrote:Vigilant, you should write Joan a friendly note.

To turn the Visual Editor on:
1. Log in to Wikipedia.
2. In the upper left part of your screen, after your username, click “Preferences”.
3. Click the tab that says “Beta features”.
4. Check the box that says “Visual editing.”
5. Scroll to the bottom of the page and click “Save.”

Wikipedia is doing a lot to make teaching with Wikipedia easier and more educational. I find it really powerful for teaching. My students’ first big assignment, adding 1200 words to a page on a bee, or starting a new page was just due. Can’t wait to see how they did!

Not the bees!

Unread post by **tarantino** » Mon Sep 28, 2015 6:16 pm

Zoloft wrote:
thekohser wrote:Vigilant, you should write Joan a friendly note.

To turn the Visual Editor on:
1. Log in to Wikipedia.
2. In the upper left part of your screen, after your username, click “Preferences”.
3. Click the tab that says “Beta features”.
4. Check the box that says “Visual editing.”
5. Scroll to the bottom of the page and click “Save.”

Wikipedia is doing a lot to make teaching with Wikipedia easier and more educational. I find it really powerful for teaching. My students’ first big assignment, adding 1200 words to a page on a bee, or starting a new page was just due. Can’t wait to see how they did!
Not the bees!

Buzz buzz.

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Mon Sep 28, 2015 6:27 pm

tarantino wrote:
Zoloft wrote:

thekohser wrote:Vigilant, you should write Joan a friendly note.

To turn the Visual Editor on:
1. Log in to Wikipedia.
2. In the upper left part of your screen, after your username, click “Preferences”.
3. Click the tab that says “Beta features”.
4. Check the box that says “Visual editing.”
5. Scroll to the bottom of the page and click “Save.”

Wikipedia is doing a lot to make teaching with Wikipedia easier and more educational. I find it really powerful for teaching. My students’ first big assignment, adding 1200 words to a page on a bee, or starting a new page was just due. Can’t wait to see how they did!

Not the bees!
Buzz buzz.

Jonathan Richman and the Modern Lovers wrote: Buzz buzz buzz goes the honeybee....

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Sep 28, 2015 6:58 pm

or starting a new page

Does the Visual Editor remove the need to make a few edits and wait a few days before you can start a new page?

Kelly Martin · Unread post by **Kelly Martin** » Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:01 pm

Poetlister wrote:
or starting a new page
Does the Visual Editor remove the need to make a few edits and wait a few days before you can start a new page?

I'm sure they'll find a way to introduce that as a bug before long. Maybe we can even convince them to let the Visual Editor disregard page protection!

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Oct 07, 2015 3:03 pm

Is that a NULL pointer I smell?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... at_startup

Visual Editor is freezing at startup

In my closed Mediawiki the Visual Editor ist freezing at start of the editing. I can not reproduce that behavior each time, but it happened at 1 of 10 startups. The Console of my firebug shows the following:

TypeError: origin is null ....cloneObject=function(origin){var key,r;r=createObject(origin.constructor.protot... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.31.198.71 (talk) 12:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

And the community liaison response? Go away kid, not my problem.

This kind of feedback would be better handled at mediawiki.org, more specifically at mw:Extension talk:VisualEditor, but maybe the product manager for VE can help here as well? --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:49, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Stellar!
The WMF, reverting back to its roots.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Oct 08, 2015 3:04 pm

Here we go!
In a Kevin McCarthy level 'I screwed up by telling the truth' way, Jimbo comes clean.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... tor_update

VisualEditor update

This note is only delivered to English Wikipedia subscribers of the visual editor's newsletter.
The location of the visual editor's preference has been changed from the "Beta" tab to the "Editing" section of your preferences on this wiki. The setting now says Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta. This aligns en.wiki with almost all the other WMF wikis; it doesn’t mean the visual editor is complete, or that it is no longer “in beta phase” though.

This action has not changed anything else for editors: it still honours editors’ previous choices about having it on or off; logged-out users continue to only have access to wikitext; the “Edit” tab is still after the “Edit source” one. You can learn more at the visual editor’s talk page.

We don’t expect this to cause any glitches, but in case your account no longer has the settings that you want, please accept our apologies and correct it in the Editing tab of Special:Preferences. Thank you for your attention, Elitre (WMF) -16:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

@Elitre (WMF): Why is it worded like this? Why can't it just be "disable Visual Editor"? Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta implies that you intend to make it un-disablable once it is out of beta. I find that difficult to believe but it still doesn't look friendly. BethNaught (talk) 17:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the question. AFAICT that’s the same message which is already used elsewhere - it has basically stayed the same since 2013, when the idea of "Beta Features" preferences didn't exist yet. It's not talking about the recent change on this wiki, or anything about "Beta Features". There are still lots of improvements yet to make, not least integrating wikitext and visual editing together properly and removing the hack of having a second edit tab that jumbles up the interface. The 'end' of the beta phase is probably 2–5 years away at this point, so the message will likely be changed as things around editing change, to better reflect what will happen. And I’ll make sure in the future the sentence is clear enough before I MassMessage hundreds of users with the exact wording. Best, -Elitre (WMF) (talk) 20:59, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. But "removing the hack of having a second edit tab"? There will be plenty of unhappy people if the wikitext editor does not remain readily accessible. BethNaught (talk) 21:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. I think it fairly obvious that the inferior experience of the wikitext editor will be strongly opposed by virtually everyone once the visual editor is good enough (and it isn't yet).--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Jimmy, you have no idea what you're talking about.
None.
Even with your sad, little caveat, people will still want access to the text editor. Even if for no other reason than to be able to fix the inevitable errors introduced by the poorly designed VE.
The WMF team PROMISED that they'd never take away the text editor. PROMISED.

You guys are so damn slippery and condescending. I wonder when you'll decide that the Visual Enema is 'good enough' for everyone else and force them to use it ... again.

Kelly Martin · Unread post by **Kelly Martin** » Thu Oct 08, 2015 3:39 pm

"Two to five years" to get the Visual Article Destructor out of beta phase? At which point it will have been in development for what, twelve years? Thirteen?

I don't understand why the WMF engineering team can't turn out a decent product in a reasonable time. I've worked on teams that did better work in less time without being paid. WMF should be charging its developers rent for their office chairs, for all the value they're getting out of them.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Oct 14, 2015 9:36 pm

I bet you a shiny dollar this bug will get fixed pronto!

Not Sure If Wiki Bug or VE Bug

But I'm finding that sometimes when I leave an edit page open for a long time (> 15 minutes), I am sometimes logged out mid-edit and therefore have to save as an IP or lose the changes I've made. I'm not sure why it logs me out. Red Fiona (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh noes!
VisualEditurd is doxxing us!!1

The Joy · Unread post by **The Joy** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 10:59 pm

I'm playing around with the VE on my personal sandbox and I have trouble writing anything after placing a link. It keeps me trapped in the link's hyperlink box.

I clicked the Link icon and selected http://www.wikipedia.org as the link, but it won't let me add anything after the link. Anyone else have this problem? I have latest Firefox browser.

Edit: Stupid VE, I don't want to edit the link anymore. I want to type things after it.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:49 am

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _markup.3F

Visual editor putting in HTML markup?

Take a look at this edit.[21]. This was the first edit by a new user, using Visual Editor, and added many bogus <div> and <span> tags. No idea what that editor did, but all those HTML tags probably were not inserted by hand. Possible Visual Editor bug, or there's some way a new editor can get it very confused. John Nagle (talk) 20:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

This happens if you do "Select All" and from the Style menu, select "language" and just pick a language. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 23:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Amusingly, the article in question is for the... Moller M400 Skycar. Which is a barely-functional device, developed over many years at a vast cost. I might have to start calling VE "Skycar" from now on.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:42 am

Hex wrote:Amusingly, the article in question is for the... Moller M400 Skycar. Which is a barely-functional device, developed over many years at a vast cost. I might have to start calling VE "Skycar" from now on.

Surely it isn't actually anything to do with our friend Erik? That would be too funny.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sat Oct 31, 2015 3:09 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Hex wrote:Amusingly, the article in question is for the... Moller M400 Skycar. Which is a barely-functional device, developed over many years at a vast cost. I might have to start calling VE "Skycar" from now on.
Surely it isn't actually anything to do with our friend Erik? That would be too funny.

Just as Ryan Kladari's middle name is Corbett, all things come full circle in the wiki-verse.

AnimuAvatar · Unread post by **AnimuAvatar** » Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:09 am

Vigilant wrote:
Poetlister wrote:
Hex wrote:Amusingly, the article in question is for the... Moller M400 Skycar. Which is a barely-functional device, developed over many years at a vast cost. I might have to start calling VE "Skycar" from now on.
Surely it isn't actually anything to do with our friend Erik? That would be too funny.
Just as Ryan Kladari's middle name is Corbett, all things come full circle in the wiki-verse.

Sounds like the wiki-version of "meme magic"

Anyways, and I know I'm probably talking out of my ass here, why can't they have done a system where it's 50/50. I.E. the old editor, but with live previews. Surely it can't be that hard to render mediawiki markup on the fly.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 7:51 am

Sherry Snyder knocking it out of the park with the customer relations!!

John, I realize that it's frustrating to see a big mess like that. I've cleaned up my share of such problems, as you would expect of anyone who's spent so much time at Wikipedia. But the real problem isn't the HTML. Izno's analysis is correct, but try this as a thought exercise: Let's pretend that WP:HTML were a policy rather than an essay, and that it was magically possible for software to comply with the directly conflicting requirements of every wiki,[1] and that it was possible for the software to know which standard HTML elements map to which local templates (and which HTML elements don't have local templates), so that if a community preferred templates, then those templates would automagically be substituted. Let's also say that this system is working perfectly, and that this wiki had chosen to always use {{lang|si}} instead of the equivalent HTML tags. Let's say that in this template-based system, the same user went to the same page and did exactly the same thing, and that you checked the diff. Then you would have seen every element on the page wrapped in the {{lang|si}} template, rather than every element on the page wrapped in the HTML tag. It would still be a mess, and it would still need to be fixed. That's because the real problem is that the user didn't understand the tool. The real problem isn't the exact method used to document the fact that the user was confused; the real problem is that the software was unclear to the user. Therefore, the most relevant and practical solution is: Make the tool be less confusing. Making the tool's purpose more obvious might result in what we actually want, which is neither HTML tags that incorrectly label the whole page as Sinhalese nor local templates that incorrectly label the whole page as Sinhalese, but instead a page that does not have all the English text marked as being in Sinhalese through any method at all. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

For example, WP:HTML was forked some years ago from m:Help:HTML in wikitext, which takes the opposite approach. It opens with a lengthy list of explicitly permitted HTML.
@Nagle and Whatamidoing (WMF): I used to see 1-2 <h2> tags a month, now with VE I see upwards 10 a day (9 for today). When I fix them later, I'll expect to see the <h2> tags surrounded by <p> and <li> tags, with <br> tags inside the <h2> tags every few days. Why are those tags surrounded or inside, who knows. Yes, a bug report has been filed and has been ignored. Sorry Izno, but VE does know there is an acceptable substitute for a section heading. Whatamidoing's answer goes along with what they say at developer's conferences... 1) wikicode is going away and only HTML/VE. 2) WMF does not have to abide by community MOS. WP:HTML is an essay, but WP:ACCESSIBILITY says use wikicode when possible and WP:MOS says use HTML sparingly. But, Whatamidoing uses a Meta help page which says what HTML codes are possible, not what should be used. Meta help page trumps community MOS. Both VE and CX are littering pages with HTML, dates wikilinked, templates (including cite templates) left in foreign languages and other messes. This goes against what Wikicode was originally created for, to make editing a Wiki page relatively simple. Whatamidoing is only here for the users of VE. The peons who cleanup VE's messes don't matter to the WMF, and thus doesn't matter to Whatamidoing either. Bgwhite (talk) 06:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:28 pm

Everyone who tries to clean up VE messes should just stop.

Instead, add a link to every single VE mistake on Sherry's talkage and let her clean them up herself.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 9:34 pm

Another awesomely hard to find bug

Switching between VE and wikitext editor

Is there supposed to be a limit to then number of times, within a single editing session, that a user can switch between VE and the wikitext editor? I ask because in doing a test, I found that after a couple of switches, I could no longer get from the wikitext editor to VE by clicking on the "Edit" tab. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Surely, no regression test on the planet could find this bug...

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Thu Nov 05, 2015 9:35 pm

Vigilant wrote:Everyone who tries to clean up VE messes should just stop.

Instead, add a link to every single VE mistake on Sherry's talkage and let her clean them up herself.

That might blow a fuse somewhere, which could even be a bonus.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:52 am

Another world beater!
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... s.3F.3F.3F

Flashing blue dots???

When I opened the VE interface to start editing Elizabeth Palmer, there were suddenly two large flashing blue dots under the link and cite points. What in heaven's name is that about? Risker (talk) 02:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

What I saw (elsewhere) were two slowly flashing dots, and not particularly large ones. But yes, odd. I have both a screen shot and a video. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 05:06, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

What the hell is going on in there?

Jim · Unread post by **Jim** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:56 pm

Vigilant wrote:
Flashing blue dots???
What the hell is going on in there?

Maybe wikipediocracy code is bleeding into VE in the wrong colour?

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:10 pm

Vigilant wrote:Another world beater!
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... s.3F.3F.3F
Flashing blue dots???

When I opened the VE interface to start editing Elizabeth Palmer, there were suddenly two large flashing blue dots under the link and cite points. What in heaven's name is that about? Risker (talk) 02:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

What I saw (elsewhere) were two slowly flashing dots, and not particularly large ones. But yes, odd. I have both a screen shot and a video. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 05:06, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
What the hell is going on in there?

A lack of adequate testing and debugging before release?

Jim · Unread post by **Jim** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:24 pm

Poetlister wrote:A lack of adequate testing and debugging before release?

You know, that could be it. What a profound insight. I'm not sure if we ever checked, analysed or commented on that aspect here at all. I'll have a look and get back to you. This is page what?

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:30 pm

Two smilies need using:

Poetlister wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Everyone who tries to clean up VE messes should just stop. Instead, add a link to every single VE mistake on Sherry's talkage and let her clean them up herself.

That might blow a fuse somewhere, which could even be a bonus.

Speaking of blown fuses...

Vigilant wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... s.3F.3F.3F
Risker wrote:Flashing blue dots???
When I opened the VE interface to start editing Elizabeth Palmer, there were suddenly two large flashing blue dots under the link and cite points. What in heaven's name is that about?
Risker (T-C-L) 02:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:15 pm

Jim wrote:
Poetlister wrote:A lack of adequate testing and debugging before release?
You know, that could be it. What a profound insight. I'm not sure if we ever checked, analysed or commented on that aspect here at all. I'll have a look and get back to you. This is page what?

Don't blame me. I was just helping out Vigilant; he asked "What the hell is going on in there?"

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 2:54 am

Vigilant wrote:Another world beater!
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... s.3F.3F.3F
Flashing blue dots???

When I opened the VE interface to start editing Elizabeth Palmer, there were suddenly two large flashing blue dots under the link and cite points. What in heaven's name is that about? Risker (talk) 02:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

What I saw (elsewhere) were two slowly flashing dots, and not particularly large ones. But yes, odd. I have both a screen shot and a video. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 05:06, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
What the hell is going on in there?

I am speechless.

Try clicking on them, and see what happens. :-)
You might want to subscribe to the newsletter, which covers recent and upcoming changes like this.
Last week's newsletter also mentions a new feature that reached the Wikipedias less than 24 hours ago, and I'd really like your POV on it. As John noted in a section above, it's now possible to switch back and forth between VisualEditor and the wikitext editor. You can do this multiple times in the same session. Can you figure out how to do it (without someone telling you, that is)? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, the point is that they were annoying and distracting when I didn't want to do anything with the links or citations in the article. On many other websites, when you click on those kinds of distractions, you wind up on a different page instead of where you started, so I was not inclined at all to click on them, quite the opposite. It feels like clickbait. If I have a chance to putter around in content in the next few days, I'll try the switchback - I've accidentally clicked "EDIT" before when I meant to "EDIT SOURCE" and have just clicked "EDIT SOURCE" to switch, but that's not included situations where I've been in the middle of a session. Honestly, I shouldn't have to need to read the newsletter to know what those dots are for, they should be obvious to the editor. Risker (talk) 16:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Why on earth would you do something like this?
Is this an easter egg hunt or an editing tool?
Who would put up with this shit from a real company with a real product and non-captive customers?

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 2:34 pm

It's hard for them to argue that someone like Risker doesn't understand the mechanics of editing. If she is struggling with the VE, how can they expect comparative beginners to cope?

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:27 am

Even more on BlueDotGate

Okay, so I went and clicked on the flashing blue dots, and guess what happened? Nothing. At least nothing that didn't happen before those blue dots were there. In other words, they're not doing anything other than being annoying. I have to ask...does the person/team that came up with this idea actually edit Wikipedia articles? I think you need some actual editors pointing out what's useful and what's just design geekery. (Standard info: Win7, FF41.0.2) Risker (talk) 05:08, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

This one seems like a minor problem.

Save Edit won't work

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/41.0
URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... esection=4

Markdarryl (talk) 01:35, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you guys ever going to have any prerelease verification ... ever?

Jim · Unread post by **Jim** » Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:01 am

deleting all but the current section (link...)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T117713

Bug report
VisualEditor

Description
Deleting all but the current section

Intention:
fixing a wikilink to point to Maryborough railway station, Queensland

Steps to Reproduce:
Clicked on "edit source" (rather than "edit" -- my mistake) on the section "Heritage listings" in Maryborough, Queensland. It opened in the source editor, I realised I had intended to use the VE, so I clicked Edit at the top of the screen and I switched into VE mode. I made my little change and then Saved.

Results:
Deleted all the other sections of the article except the Heritage listings

Expectations:
Editing a section doesn't delete the rest of the article!

Page where the issue occurs
diff

Web browser
Operating system
Skin

Notes:
It looks like doing section editing with the source editor and then switching into the VE (even if you have not made any changes) gives the VE only the current section to work with.
Any SAVE then destroys the rest of the article.

Workaround or suggested solution

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Wed Nov 18, 2015 2:57 pm

We need a slow clap smiley for that one....

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:21 pm

Obviously Visual Editor "isn't here to build an encyclopedia..."

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:36 pm

Zoloft wrote:Obviously Visual Editor "isn't here to build an encyclopedia..."

In its current release, it's a strict deletionist.

AnimuAvatar · Unread post by **AnimuAvatar** » Thu Nov 19, 2015 6:50 pm

Vigilant wrote:
Zoloft wrote:Obviously Visual Editor "isn't here to build an encyclopedia..."
In its current release, it's a strict deletionist.

VE for ArbCom anyone?

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:29 am

Looking into VE's current status reveals that the nowiki problem is back again, templates aren't well understood and regression testing is still not something the WMF engineering corps knows how to do well.

Peeking at en.wp recent changes for article space reveals that VE still enjoys a pathetic 4.8% usage, meaning 19 out of every 20 edits are still being done in wikitext.

I'd love to see just how many dollars per VE edit the WMF is at right now.
I'd bet that it's still over $10 spent on on VE's total build out per edit using the tool.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:22 am

Doc James' signpost article led to some interesting discussion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... 1-13/Op-ed

Restricted grants
Restricted grants can change the direction of an organization. If allowed they need to be very carefully managed. The Bylaws require Board approval of restricted grants over $100,000, and for good reason. In a movement like ours we must not be “selling” ideas to potential funders that we are not willing to sell to the movement as a whole.

Grant applications should be published at the same time as they are submitted to potential funders. This would keep those in a position of management accountable. It would reduce the risk of unpleasant surprises down the road. The community would also be aware of what has been promised to those who are funding us. Best practice would be to take this a step further by discussing what kind of grants we should accept – an idea put forward by the previous ED, Sue Gardner.

With the grant for the visual editor (VE), from my understanding there was a timeline around rollout agreed to with the funder. Thus VE was rolled out before it was ready, as exemplified by the difficulty initially of adding references with the new system. It should have been obvious to all involved that rollout was too early. We ended up taking an idea that had a great deal of support from the community at large and turning it into a loss for the WMF’s programming teams.

Those who have pushed the most for transparency around restricted grants have left the organization. We now need “clear standard for transparency [around] restricted grants”].

And some unhappy questions

Who funded the visual editor with a restricted grant? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 16:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Was this common knowledge? I remember the general outline of the VE deployment dramahz, superprotect, and so on, and it seems as though this would have changed the tenor of the discussion considerably had it been known. Choess (talk) 17:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

VE was funded by 3.6 million from the Stanton Foundation [1] in 2011. From my understanding it was not a restricted grant but I have heard rumblings that this funding was part of the reason for the early roll out. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:27, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, James. My reading of Sue's blog was that she has no problem with restricted grants, provided they're for something we'd be doing anyway. We do have to be careful not to let the tail (funder) wag the dog, though, and avoid taking on projects that will consume resources (ED's attention, legal time, floor space, etc.) to the detriment of higher-priority projects. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 23:54, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

My reading is she felt they need to be strictly managed and accepted with care. They are not a problem per say but can easily turn into a problem. If the WMF is required to chose between a funder and a super majority of volunteers I hope they would think long and hard before siding with the funder. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Is it possible for the WMF to screw things up any harder?
The more stuff that becomes public, the more areas they are shown to be incompetent in.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Tue Feb 16, 2016 7:20 pm

It would surely have been possible to say that VE wasn't ready and that rolling it out in a very imperfect form would be counter-productive, as indeed it has proved to be.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue Feb 16, 2016 7:24 pm

Poetlister wrote:It would surely have been possible to say that VE wasn't ready and that rolling it out in a very imperfect form would be counter-productive, as indeed it has proved to be.

VisualEditor was the Exploding whale (T-H-L) of software engineering.

Mason · Unread post by **Mason** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 5:23 am

It's back!

I just tried to edit a page and noticed the "Edit source" tab was gone. I clicked "Edit" and the visual editor loaded, after about 10 seconds of browser non-responsiveness. Then the following popped up:

Editing tabs

Wikipedia now remembers which editor you prefer. You can switch edit modes as you edit, and change your preference later.

Always give me the source editor
Always give me the visual editor if possible
Show me both editor tabs
Use the editor I used in my last edit

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:01 am

Now that Lila has been burned, the WMF is worse than ever, with no hope of attracting a good CEO.

Is it the most dysfunctional organization with the most arrogant and incompetent engineering staff known to man?

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:25 am

deleting all but the current section (link...)

(yadda yadda yadda)

Workaround or suggested solution

........"Disable Visual Editor and never use it again."

RfB

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:57 am

Randy from Boise wrote:
deleting all but the current section (link...)

The writer started editing a section with the old standard editor but then switched to Visual Editor to finish the job.
Saving deleted the rest of the article.

Do any of the VE coders have computer-science degrees?

Kelly Martin · Unread post by **Kelly Martin** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:02 am

Moral Hazard wrote:Do any of the VE coders have computer-science degrees?

I'd be fairly surprised if there's more than four CS degrees in the entire Wikimedia Engineering team, top to bottom.

Then again, I don't have one either.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:16 am

Oh, look!
WMF engineering lying about the VisualEdsel ... again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... ary_editor

And, once again, there's clueless Sherry, User:WhatTheHellAmIDoingOutHere or was it User:WhereIsMyAssWithBothHands, trying to tell the patients that they've gotten the best mush that they're going to get and that they should 'just lie back and enjoy it.'

Wiki-Whac-A-Mole · Unread post by **Wiki-Whac-A-Mole** » Wed May 11, 2016 3:13 pm

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... to_enwiki.:

Fram wrote: Some of you may remember Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 145#VE was imposed as primary editor and the subsequent Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 146#Earth to JDForrester. Basically, before the new release of the choice of editing environment (wikitext or VE) in April, User:Alsee asked User:Jdforrester (WMF) explicitly that wikitext would be the default for new editors at enwiki, and was promised quite clearly that this would be the case.

Surprise, surprise, after the release it turns out that this is not true and VE is the primary editor. This issue is raised here, at Phabricator, and at Jdforrester's talk page, but no reaction follows. Despite this being the only post to his talk page in that period, he claimed that his very late response was because he hadn't seen the message and had too many notifications.[23] That's why we have the "you have new messages" orange notice here, of course, but perhaps that's too difficult.

Now, the Phabricator task has suddenly been declined by Jdforrester with the following text:

Yup, sorry about this.

I didn't configure the wiki exactly as I had intended, which indeed had the effect that new users who've never edited before will get the visual editor on first edit (unless their machine is incompatible). The plan was to make that part of change subsequently to the main change, which was to provide only one edit tab (with the editor chosen by the user) instead of having two.

Now that both these changes are deployed, I think going back and then forward would cause confusion and disruption with no benefits for our editors. The benefit for users following the plan would have been a lack of unexpected changes. However, this is not something I can create from the spilt milk we now have, sadly.

Consequently, I won't be undoing this change, as I don't think there is overall value in so doing. In future I'll take more care in writing these kinds of changes, sorry.
(end of quote) This, of course, is not only going back on earlier promises without any further discussion, but also seems to be a, what is the acceptable way of saying this, right, an "incorrect statement". Please, Jdforrester, explain how it would be confusing to present new editors on enwiki from now on with wikitext as the primary editor instead of VE, as planned and promised? The editors who have registered meanwhile (between early April and now) don't need to be set back, that damage is done, but the discussion is only about first edits by new editors. How will it be confusing if from now on, they get wikitext as the primary editor? And why then wasn't this a problem when you made your promise earlier? Please provide us with a much better explanation of why you closed this as "decline", as the current one is utterly unconvincing.

Please reopen the phab ticket and do what has been asked of you and promised by you, instead of inventing excuses why it just happens that the WMF-wanted situation is the one we end up with, again, for the umpteenth time, with the minority editor imposed as the default.

User:Elitre (WMF), since you are a community liaison who actually functions in that job, could you please liaise in this situation and convince Jdforrester that simply sending us a polite "sorry, I never planned to do this but told you otherwise, now fuck off" is not really acceptable? It sens the same old unacceptable message of the disconnect between WMF and enwiki, and the disregard some of the people there have for concerns expressed here." (Originally posted on Wikipedia by Fram on 09:45, 11 May 2016 (UTC))

----

The only thing I disagree with is that claim that the WMF saying "sorry, I never planned to do this but told you otherwise, now fuck off" is not really acceptable. Clearly it is, or there would be consequences for blatantly lying to the community... --Wiki-Whac-A-Mole

Kumioko · Unread post by **Kumioko** » Wed May 11, 2016 4:18 pm

This is a typical "better to get forgiveness than permission" sort of action we have all come to expect from the WMF. As Fram stated this will only help to expand the rift between the WMF and the community.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed May 11, 2016 4:24 pm

Kumioko wrote:This is a typical "better to get forgiveness than permission" sort of action we have all come to expect from the WMF. As Fram stated this will only help to expand the rift between the WMF and the community.

There's no CTO, an interim CEO with no development experience, a VPEng who watched cluelessly as his staff revolted and fled the building....

Forrester is the new Mo:eller.
He can sit at the WMF, stuff his face with donuts and do whatever the hell he wants.
There's no real management to put a brake on his behavior.

SB_Johnny · Unread post by **SB_Johnny** » Wed May 11, 2016 4:31 pm

Now we know why they wanted to get rid of Lila.